Reasoning from the Unborn to the Undead: Cryonics and Exceptions to the

1. Reasoning from the Unborn to the Undead: Cryonics and Exceptions to the Ascertainable Beneficiary Requirement in Trust Law Igor Levenberg St. John’s University School of Law

2. Obstacles to the PRT • The Rule Against Perpetuities • “A contingent future interest must vest, if it all, within twenty-one years after the expiration of some life in being when the interest was created.” • Abolished or changed in many states, so no longer a meaningful obstacle • But what is a “life in being?” • The Ascertainable Beneficiary Requirement

3. Trust Mechanics Property (Bundle of Rights) Legal Title Equitable Title Control Benefit Enforcement Trustee Beneficiary Fiduciary Duty

4. No Beneficiary = No Trust • Exceptions • Unborn Beneficiaries • Trusts for Purposes Beneficiary Form

5. Unborn Beneficiaries Conceived “Life in being” for the purposes of the Rule Against Perpetuities Same rights and benefits under trust law as a living person Interests protected by court appointed guardian Can be sole beneficiary of trust Unconceived Really a contingency with rights, not a “life in being.” If trust challenged still gets a court appointed representative to look out for its interests Limitations Cannot be sole beneficiary, since it is not a “life in being” Must be possibility that child will be born in the future

6. Reasoning from the Unborn to the Undead • Cryopreserved Embryos and Davis v. Davis • The Intermediate Being Theory • The Contingent Beneficiary Theory

7. Davis v. Davis • Divorce case decided by Tennessee Supreme Court • Issue: What to do with frozen embryos? • Wife wants to donate, husband wants to discard • The real issue: Person/Property Dichotomy • Does property law apply or family law or something else? • Holding: Cryopreserved pre-embryos are neither persons nor property, but occupy an interim category that entitles them to special respect because of their potential for human life. • The potential for human life is a recognized value in law. It makes a difference. • The potential for life changes the legal calculus. • Certiorari denied by U.S. Supreme Court

8. Trust Law and the Davis Principle • A cryopreserved embryo is past the point of conception, so is it a “life in being” for the purposes of trust law? • Just like a normal embryo it has the potential for human life. • But no guarantee a person will be born. • Have not seen cases on point • Take away: Preembryos blur the legal boundaries at the beginning of life, cryonics blurs them at the end.

9. Intermediate Being Theory • Cryonaut analogous to cryopreserved embryo • Not legally alive, but an interim category entitled to special respect because of potential for human life. • Legal rights of a conceived unborn beneficiary • Can hold equitable title • Can be sole beneficiary • Entitled to court appointed guardian • Basically, the ideal Personal Revival Trust. • BUT: Court must first determine that cryonaut has a potential for human life and overcome policy objections. • Difficult because cryonics is speculative

10. Overcoming Objections • Distinguish between cryonics and other post-mortem remains disposal. • Intent. Especially important in trust context. • Legal Fiction • The Fertile Octogenarian • Corporations • If there is a will, there is a way. So can courts find the will? • Policy reasons to support PRTs • We value life. Inconsistent with the values of our society to disregard intent not to die. • Socially Beneficial Capital • Actually achieves goals of the Rule Against Perpetuities • Taxes on Interest and Reanimation

11. Likelihood of Success • Low • Difficult to overcome the current conception of death • Courts are risk averse, not likely to go against majority sentiments

12. Contingent Beneficiary Exception • Analogous to unconceived unborn beneficiary • Possibility of revival creates a contingent future interest deserving of legal protection • Entitled to court appointed representative to protect the future interest • Same limitations as unconceived unborn beneficiary exception • Cannot be sole beneficiary • Another person has standing to challenge the trust • Despite weaker protections, has advantages

13. Advantages • Does not require courts to view cryonauts as anything but dead • All we are doing is giving legal protection to a a future interest that may or may not come into existence. • Probably the best candidate for a PRT • So lets look at its main weakness…

14. …its never been done. • We know that an unconceived unborn beneficiary can come into existence. Children are born all the time. • But no one has ever been revived from cryostasis. • BUT: This argument puts the burden on the wrong party! • Obligation to effectuate intent of the trust maker unless: • Against pubic policy • Not possible to achieve trust purposes • Courts will be comfortable with this PRT theory.

15. PRT Alternatives • Revival as condition subsequent • Trust for purposes

16. Revival as condition subsequent • Different from contingent beneficiary theory • No court appointed representative to protect the cryonaut’s interests • Other Disadvantages • Official beneficiary draws on funds until revival • Advantages • Can’t challenge the conditions until it occurs, and if it does-the cryonaut is revived-it is doubtful a court will deny the cryonaut his funds. • Facially valid. Don’t need to stretch the law.

17. Trusts for Purposes • Charitable trust • Perpetual in every state • Don’t need specific beneficiary because enforced by state Attorney General • Honorary Trust • Not really a trust • Subject to RAP, even in post-RAP jurisdictions • Exception: Perpetual trusts for the care of graves

18. Piggyback Trust • Piggyback condition subsequent onto a charitable trust • Advantages • Perpetual everywhere • Cannot be terminated on the grounds that the purpose has been achieved-there will always been a need for charity • Usually not allowed to piggyback non-charitable purpose onto charitable trust. But here is not implicated until the cryonaut is revived, at which point society can be expected to be more deferential to cryonaut rights.

19. Honorary Trust • Trust for the care of grave • The grave is actually the cryostasis pod • Attach condition subsequent terminating trust upon revival, with trust funds going to revivee. • Limitations on how much money can be put in such trust • But facially valid

20. CONCLUSION • At this point the Ascertainable Beneficiary Requirement can be overcome, to a certain extent. • But I am optimistic that with time cryonauts will be able to have full PRTs. • Lives are Good. Society and the legal system already recognize this, and there is a historical momentum in expanding the idea of who is human and what rights exist.